Achhaivar And Others vs State Of U.P.
2011 Latest Caselaw 3028 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 43
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL U/S 374 CR.P.C. No. - 4268 of 2011
 

 
Petitioner :- Achhaivar And Others
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P.
 
Petitioner Counsel :- Prem Prakash
 
Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Shri Kant Tripathi,J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned AGA and perused the impugned judgement rendered by the learned  Additional Sessions Judge, Room No. 16, Deoria  in Session Trial No. 160 of 1999.

Admit. Summon lower court record. 

Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that there is a cross version vide S.T. No. 442 of 1997 (State v  Balesar) and according to the cross version Mr. Markandey Chaubey sustained injuries and died on the spot. Two persons from the accused side had also sustained injuries. In the cross case a judgement of conviction has been recorded. It was next submitted that in the present case the role of firing has been assigned to Mr. Markandey Chaubey (since dead). It was further contended that the appellants  were on bail during the trial and never abused the same. The maximum sentence imposed on each of the appellants is of seven years under sections 307/149 IPC. It was lastly contended that in case the appellants are not released on bail, the appeal would,  in due course, become infructuous as there is no hope of an early hearing of the appeal due to heavy dockets.

In my opinion, prima facie, the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the appellants have substance, therefore, it is just and expedient to exercise the discretion in favour of the appellant.

Keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, the severity of punishment and submissions of the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned AGA, I am of the view that that the appellants have made out a case for bail.

Let the appellants Achhaivar, Deepu (correct name is Pappu) alias Sushil, Haidu (correct name is Faitu) alias Vijay, Satish and Guddu involved in the aforesaid session trial  be released on bail during the pendency of the appeal on their each furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned

The realisation of half of the fine shall remain stayed during pendency of the appeal, provided the appellants deposit half of the fine within one month.

On acceptance of bail bonds and personal bonds, the lower court shall transmit photo state copies thereof to this Court for being kept on the record of this appeal.

Let the paper books be prepared.

List the appeal for hearing in due course.

Order Date :- 26.7.2011

shailesh